The Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice and Research (formerly the Journal of the Canadian Dietetic Association) is the official peer-reviewed publication of Dietitians of Canada.

The Journal considers manuscripts for publication that focus on applied food and nutrition research and other contributions to best practices in dietetics. The Journal accepts manuscripts in the following four peer-reviewed categories: Original Research, Review, Perspectives in Practice, Reports/Case Studies.

Role of the Reviewer

1. Your primary task is to determine the acceptability of the paper, considering its soundness, intrinsic merit, interest, value, clarity and readability. Note that qualitative and quantitative research has different criteria for rigour. Some of the points that you should have in mind are listed on the attached checklist. To the extent possible, you are providing constructive feedback to authors for the purpose of improving the quality of research and publications.
2. The review has two parts:
   
   a) Report to the Editor
   
   Your recommendations to the Editor are not transmitted to the author. This is the place for any pungent comments, specification of key factors determining acceptability, or particular reservation you may wish to express.
   
   b)  Comments for Authors
   
   Your constructive criticisms and questions directed to the author are on a separate form from those to the Editor. These comments go directly to the author without editing. Be as clear and concise as possible since these comments form the basis for the author's revision of the manuscript. Please do not include in this section, comments on whether the paper should or should not be accepted.
3. Please number the points and indicate the page and line # in your Comments for Authors to facilitate checking the author's rebuttals or explanation of revisions.
4. It is particularly helpful to the Editor and the author if your comments differentiate clearly between
   
   a) the need for clarification or improvement of a manuscript which is generally acceptable for publication, and
   
   b) key methodological and scientific criticisms, which limit the acceptability of the manuscript.
5. The editorial procedure maintains the anonymity of the reviewer. Likewise, reviewers should respect authors' rights by not making copies of the manuscript or sharing it with others, except with permission of the Editor. Manuscripts should be destroyed after completing the review.

General Check List for Reviewers

Note: The principles relating to clarity, precision of language and logic apply to all articles. Considerations are provided for quantitative and qualitative studies separately where relevant. The organization will depend on the type of study and whether the manuscript has been prepared as an Original Research, Report, Review, Perspectives in Practice or Case Study article. For a description of these article categories, please refer to the Guide for Authors

For the latter four categories, specific sections on Methods, Results and Discussion may not apply and the review should focus on logical development of the text. For example, the body of the article should develop the subject in logical order using appropriate subheadings and present a systematic approach to the investigation of the issue or description of the program.

Topic

• Is the paper suitable for our readership?
• Does the topic contribute to the body of professional knowledge?
• Are you aware of whether the material has been published previously in the same or similar form?
• Do all parts warrant publication? If not, please justify.
• Has the author made the significance of the work clear?
  
  

Title

• Does the title describe the topic?

Abstract

• Is the abstract intelligible by itself?
• Does the abstract state: 1) the purpose of the study, 2) the basic procedures, 3) the main findings,
  4) the principal conclusions and application?
• Is it 200 words or less?  

Introduction

• Is the purpose of the paper clearly stated?
• Is the rationale clearly and concisely summarized?
• Is the literature review confined to development of the conceptual framework for the article?
• Are the statements of fact referenced?
• Are generalities avoided?

Method

• Is the study design clear and appropriate for the objectives?

For qualitative studies:

• Does the study justify the methodological approach taken (e.g. grounded theory, qualitative description/thematic analysis etc.), include appropriate methodological references, and provide sufficient detail on participant inclusion criteria, recruitment procedures, data collection and analysis steps and processes that are consistent with the methodological approach.

• Does the research identify how trustworthiness and credibility of findings was ensured?

For quantitative studies:   

• Are the methods and procedures (including test instruments, parameters measured, selection of subjects or target audience, analytical techniques, statistical methods) adequately described or referenced?
• Are the test instruments examined for validity and reliability? Is the sample size justified?

Results

• Is a clear description of sample/participants and their characteristics provided?
• Are the results presented in a logical sequence?
• For qualitative studies, are data (e.g. quotes from interviews) used to support interpretation of findings? Are themes and concepts fully developed? Is a rich description of findings provided?
• Are the tables and figures cited at appropriate points in the text?
• Does the text avoid repetition of data presented in the tables and figures?  
• Is the statistical analysis appropriate and complete?

Discussion

• Does the discussion interpret rather than repeat the results section?
• Are the implications discussed and properly qualified?
• Are the limitations discussed?
• Are the findings related to other studies?
• Are the conclusions logical?

Relevance to Practice

• Are the applications to best practice in dietetics logical, well-considered, pertinent and insightful?

Tables and Figures

• Are all the tables necessary/non-repetitious of information provided in the text? Could some be incorporated in the text? Are they understandable without referring to the text? Could the data be presented more concisely? Are the table titles and figure legends clear and succinct?
• Are column headings and units clear and appropriate?
• Are the formats of similar tables consistent?
• Would a different format of presentation be clearer?
• Do the numbers add up?

References

• Are the references cited current and appropriate in scope? Are they all necessary? Are appropriate references omitted?
• Does the reference citation format follow the Guide for Authors?

Overall

• Considering each of the above sections, is each presented concisely? Is the information relevant and non-repetitious?

Download a copy of the Guide for Reviewers here: ENGLISH FRANCAIS

For further information:

Naomi Cahill, PhD, RD
Editor, Canadian Journal of Dietetic Practice & Research
c/o Dietitians of Canada
99 Yorkville Avenue, Second Floor
Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5R 1C1
Phone: 416-596-0857
Email: [email protected]
Website: www.dietitians.ca
CJDPR Website: www.dcjournal.ca